I feel called upon to comment as I "made you do it"!
Now here we have a good example of internal focalization and style indirect libre. To explain: the focalizer is he whom we see the action through, or in this case, she. Madonna. She is our pov. And it's internal because we're inside her head and we see her thoughts. (So it's tell!! And not show!!!!)
Free indirect style: because there are no declarative words surrounding her thoughts (she said to herself. it occurred to her that ents were babes) but the thoughts are presented as a seamless one with the rest of the narrative.
The seemed, however, is not internal. That is external. Here we have the narratrix interfering and coming in with her own comments. Because to Madonna it wouldn't "seem" as if she had something in her eye.
Um, I could go on. But I am getting carried away. Narratology does strange things to me.
But: Madonna! Ents! And if they call each other 'babe': entwives?????????? It's girlslash, it is!!!!!!!
no subject
Now here we have a good example of internal focalization and style indirect libre. To explain: the focalizer is he whom we see the action through, or in this case, she. Madonna. She is our pov. And it's internal because we're inside her head and we see her thoughts. (So it's tell!! And not show!!!!)
Free indirect style: because there are no declarative words surrounding her thoughts (she said to herself. it occurred to her that ents were babes) but the thoughts are presented as a seamless one with the rest of the narrative.
The seemed, however, is not internal. That is external. Here we have the narratrix interfering and coming in with her own comments. Because to Madonna it wouldn't "seem" as if she had something in her eye.
Um, I could go on. But I am getting carried away. Narratology does strange things to me.
But: Madonna! Ents! And if they call each other 'babe': entwives?????????? It's girlslash, it is!!!!!!!